Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Science Technology

New Technique For 2D Imaging Of Nanostructures 81

Posted by timothy from the good-things-small-packages dept.
NanotechNews.com writes: "It seems that researchers (One of those is Norm Bartelt) at the U.S. Department of Energy?s Sandia National Laboratory have created a new way to represent self-assembling nanostructures (The bottom up approach of nanotechnology). They can record in real time, real space (real time video) the nanostructures, which self-assemble and transform. They used a low-energy electron microscope (LEEM). Furthermore the core of the news is: "Theorists long have believed that competing attractive and repulsive inter-atomic interactions can lead to the spontaneous formation of ordered patterns in widely varying chemical and physical systems. Potentially, such patterns could be used as templates for nanostructure fabrications.""
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

New Technique For 2D Imaging Of Nanostructures More

New Technique For 2D Imaging Of Nanostructures

Comments Filter:
  • for the wallpaper industry

    Just imagine self aligning wallpaper that glues itself to the wall.

  • A while back, we saw a method for moving objects around using complex waveforms [slashdot.org]

    It occured to me that this basic idea (at extremely higher frequencies) could be used to move nanoscale structures around.

    • The problem there is that at that small resolution you cannot trust what you see. There's a basic limit expressed in terms of Heisenberg uncertainity principle which states that if u know the position then u can't know the velocity. So theres a trade off there. So it's not possible to move nanoscale structures around .
    • Basically, it's a nice idea, but not really feasible.

      Someone already noted that Heisenberg says we cant trust the position of very very small things, and even if we could, by the time that technique moved the nanostructures into place, we'd certainly no longer know where they were. That previous article points out a useful way to move multiple large objects at once, but it's nearly useless on small, nanoscale objects, even in limited quantities.
      • Why do you think that this is approaching the Heisenberg limit? It is working on the same scale as cellular cehmistry works e.g. DNA decoding and protein synthesis. The Heisenberg limit, at normal temperatures, only cuts in another level lower, for individual electrons and suchlike.

        Mind you, this is an awful long way from anything useful. Good research, though.
      • The Heisenberg limit will come into play when we deal with objects the size of electrons. This nanoscale structure deals with objects the size of atoms, about a thousand times the larger than where you have to worry about Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle.
  • so many times have experiments proven intution wrong.
    Says Sandia researcher Richard Plass, "Kinetics say that 10,000 moving atoms should go anywhere. Nobody really expected an assembly would arise."
    Whoever said life couldn;t evolve just cuz it's probabilistically impossible for a random process to create something as intelligent as human(allright with the exception of / . ers), needs to think again.

  • Matter replication? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by gnovos ( 447128 )
    How far is 2-D from 3-D (or at least multiple layers of 2-D) nanostructures? And then how far from those 3-D nano-structures to 3-D human-touchable sized structures? Primitive matter replication may not be that far away folks, and if you think there are problems now with digital copy protection laws, you ain't seen nuthin yet!

    Imagine the chaos to come when a dollar bill, or a stock certificate, or a strand of DNA can be copied perfectly, a molecular twin of the original...

    I don't know if we are headed for utopia or armageddon, but at least it's going to be an interesting trip! :)

    • Fourtunately a perfect copy of a bill will have a perfect copy of the serial number. Be fairly easy to filter these out of the economy.

      As for introducing it. If you needed perfect copies it wouldn't be an issue today.

      • Re:Matter replication? (Score:2, Insightful)

        by gnovos ( 447128 )
        "Be fairly easy to filter these out of the economy."

        How exactly? If the copy is perfect, I mean down to the exact placement of every molecule, who has the "real" dollar? For that matter, who has the "real" Picasso? Who has the "real" Ford Taurus, the "real" can of Hormel chili, or the "real" first-edition signed copy of Spiderman? Sit and think for a minute of all the physical things in your life that have some monetary value. How many of those things would suddenly become worth purely the cost of raw materials if the "Matter Replicator" becomes a reality.

        I admit that this technology is a ways off, but it is feasible. It isn't just a pipe dream for the SF writers to ponder over for the next 1,000 years, it is something that may exist in the next 100.

        How will we deal with it? There will be a huge paradigm shift in the world of economics when such a device exists, and we aren't going to be prepared for it...

    • It's not the money I worry about being copied, it's ME I'm worried about someone copying. If there is another me that is made, that other knows all my secrets. Even DNA copying wouldn't compare.
      • who cares, an exact copy of you will know everything you know, But once he hears he is simply a replicated object he will promptly shut up. think about it, if someone you don't know asks about your secrets, what do you say? if it is "No fucking way you idiot", your replica will say the exact same!!!
    • Why talk about money, when such a technology would make money obselete?

      Indeed, maybe you could take this a step further and say that a replicator would abolish the concept of "economy" as we know it.

      Economy is based on "scarcity", that resources are limited, money being a way of measuring relative worths (albeit poorly). Take that away, and money loses its representative power.

      I can think of three possible replacement currencies: 1) Respect 2) Services and 3) Willingness to use replicated weapons.

    • "if you think there are problems now with digital copy protection laws, you ain't seen nuthin yet!"

      Star trek like replicators, Oh my! I can see it now... download your billz here. Seriously though, this would extend IP laws to physical objects since they would also be an arrangement of "numbers" of some kind... hell, they already are. This would open up a serious can of worms and with laws like the DMCA, the chilling effect would be horrible. Granted, I highly doubt a replication device would fall into the hands of consumers without serious copy protections built in. I highly doubt consumers would even be able to buy such devices but lets speculate for a moment.

      Now for the funny part - Imagine downloading warez like:
      happy_meal.img
      vaio_laptop.img
      notebook_paper.img

      Now, the above examples could be forseen by the industries as bad bad bad. Imagine MacDonalds with a lawsuit against burger pirates. Imagine Sony going bonkers because people are copying their laptop and not buying the hardware. Notebook paper replication will at least save trees. Now, if intricate machines like laptops can be replicated, you'd better believe that such replicators would only be used in the industry to cut manufacturing costs. Create one perfect laptop and clone the hell out of it.

      The first example, a happy meal image, is quite interesting to ponder. If such an abundant supply of food could exist, how long before lawsuits fly around when poorer nations use this technology to feed the hungry. Will MacDonalds, Pizza Hut, or even the local grocery store chains throw a fit? I bet they would! It will be like Drug companies going after the third world for cloning their pills, only much worse.

      Anyhow, my final thought to throw out to all of you would concern the free software philosophy as it applies to physical objects. Would RMS create an open source hardware equivalent of GNU for the benefit of humanity despite the loss of "potential" revenue for the evil, greedy corporations? Would someone create a good steak and image it for free? Would you check the source first... Anti-virus could have a new meaning in this realm you know. As far as hardware goes, what would stop someone from creating a perfect looking/working laptop that would explode after 5 minutes of use? The world is certainly going to be an interesting place if nanotech has this potential.
      • happy_meal.img
        vaio_laptop.img
        notebook_paper.img

        Now, the above examples could be forseen by the industries as bad bad bad. Imagine MacDonalds with a lawsuit against burger pirates.

        No problem, just get hold of microsoft_legal_team.img ;-)

        cmclean

      • It's an interesting parallel between internet and matter. Basically, a replicator could do for matter what the internet has done for information.

        The internet is the open environment today because the "people" got to it before the corporations (or more succinctly, it wasn't built with a profit motive in mind).

        If replication technology happens, a major decider of its impact will be who gets to it first. If it remains a closed technology, with a few companies replicating some unmanufacturable in the name of money, we're in for a bad time. Like, say if the only C compiler was in Microsoft hands. (The information->matter, compiler->replicator analogy has some interesting mileage in it...)

        Replication could be the e=mc^2 of the 21st century - matter and information being interchangeable.

      • I highly doubt consumers would even be able to buy such devices but lets speculate for a moment.

        Way not build two replicators and using one to replicate the other?
      • Phear the Hamburglar.
    • The impression I got from the article is that this has nothing to do with fabrication. They are simply imaging a process which occurs anyway. However, I may have misunderstood.
  • The primary application of this type of imaging is immediately obvious [scopenews.com] to any seasoned slashdotter.
  • I have to say it all looks very cool... but from my understanding of the article (call me stoopid if you so desire) the pattern was predicted based on various things such as the elements involved and temperature. ie. a limited number of factors. Surely that means that there is a realistic limit to the number of patterns that can be created?

    I mean, it's possible that this limited number of patterns would be enough to create useful (ie. computational/mechanical) structures at the 100 x nano level, but I can't see this technology leading to the complete matter pattern replication mentioned earlier.

    Not to say that we won't someday see complete matter pattern replication, just that methinks this aint it.

    -Perc.
  • As far as my understanding goes, you still need the material to form or build something from. It's not like building something from hot air, (well, at least not if it's not going to be made of CO2, O or N), you still need to provide the atoms you want to build your new stuff from. Your mp3 player uses gold conductors? You need gold. You want to have some nuclear missles for self-defense? You need uraninum or the likes. So, until we can't put single protons, neutrons and eletrons together to make custom made atoms, it's not like star trek. (*sigh*)
  • Public data on the low energy electron microscope was first published [asu.edu] (as far as i know) in late 1995.

    So...my question is: what the hell took these people so long!? i'm happy to finally see results from the

    LEEM, a versatile tool that can be used in everything from cancer research to advanced molecular physics

    with good effect. Hopefully this is just one of the many breakthroughs we'll see slashdotted as a result of the LEEM.
  • They made real-time videos, right? Why are they not offering them up for download? I see no reason to classify them...

Slashdot Top Deals

One person's error is another person's data.

Close